After CAS, Trai lays the 'Trap' for TV viewers

Sudha Nagaraj, TNNJun 25, 2004, 01.06am IST

NEW DELHI: Hey couch potatoes, the only way you can avoid the conditional access system (CAS) and say good-bye to set-top boxes (STBs) is to walk straight into another technology 'Trap' that is being prepared for you.

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai), which is in advanced stages of consultations with broadcasters, MSOs (large cable TV distributors) and LCOs (the local cable man) is weighing the pros and cons of an "alternative": Traps or "frequency locks" installed at every consumer's doorway (or where the drop cable enters the house) that controls reception of pay channels.

Apparently, Trai has reservations on the efficacy of CAS STBs, including the fact that they are not inter-operable. MSOs who have sunk in crore of rupees into STBs are naturally wary. They have cobbled together a formal partnership — the MSO Alliance — that includes Hathway, IndusInd, InCablenet, SitiCable, Sumangali, RPG Network, Trinity Platco.

Sources among these players claim they have finalised commercial inter-operability agreements, meaning if a consumer moves to a new residence, the MSO servicing that area would replace the STB. Further, MSOs had agreed on rental/lease rental schemes for consumers, making it easy for consumers to exchange/return STBs.

Sources also see the Trap solution as nothing but dismantling of the CAS proposal. Here is why: For one, Traps are not "addressable" —they are passive devices that cannot link to the subscriber management system, leave alone authenticate data such as channels subscribed to. The accountability across the distribution chain — LCOs, MSOs, broadcasters — thus remains non-transparent.

More important is the much-hyped "choice" factor that CAS promised. With Trap, this is further compromised because a Trap can either allow all pay channels or block all pay channels. For choice, one Trap for one channel would be required, which is not feasible.

"Mumbai, with 2m cable homes would need 80m Traps for the 40 available pay channels," points out an MSO. Imagine the technician's house-call each time a consumer decides to change channel line-up. The Indian viewer has access to about 100 channels, while in parts of the US where Traps are used, only 20-30 channels are available.

Another scenario: If one opts for 20 pay channels, 20 Traps have to be installed and at an average of 4 inches, 20 Traps in series would add up to 80 inches or six feet in length.

The Alliance members feel that this would also mean an insertion loss in signal strength to the tune of 20-35 dB, which in turn means hardly any usable signal. For the same reason, tiered 'trapping' of channels as basic and pay would be quite cumbersome.

"Due to the slope characteristic of the filter, adjacent channels, even if free-to-air, would be affected," explained sources. To complicate matters, filter age is rendered ineffective.

Other reasons put forth on why Traps would not work is that the LCO (who would be responsible for installing it) need not set it up at all. The MSO or broadcaster would have no way of checking. Also, a consumer can just dismantle it and start seeing the channels he wants.

In the US, Traps are deployed atop 50 feet poles, accessible through bucket trucks. With the transmission itself clear along the lines, it is feared that the signals are not secure and can be hacked.

As the MSOs are wont to point out, Asianet had already tried out Trap in Kerala and it did not work.